very few products are produced commercially (not covertly, or in sample quantities, or stealthily) that don't circulate in the trade rags or the on the net in a quarter.
Maybe, but if you could invalidate somebody's patent just by infringing quietly for 90 days there would be more incentive to create a product that exists solely to invalidate the patent, and a worthwhile product could come along once the patent no longer applied.
I have an AI professor who came up with and patented an algorithm for a recommendation system. A couple of years ago, he was excited that a small, startup company had come to him to license his patent to make a movie recommendation site. He got a fair amount of money which he used to help fund other research.
Now suppose your system were in place. Instead of coming to my professor to license the patent, the company simply launches the website quietly. After it's been up 90 days they start buying ads and the website takes off. If the patent holder tries to enforce the patent once they hear about the site, the company can simply show that the website had been available for 90 days prior to the enforcement attempt.
I think a better system would require enforcement once there was a reasonable expectation that the patent holder should know about the infringement. This would mean no waiting for JPEGs to become the top graphic on the web before enforcing the patents, and Microsoft couldn't claim Linux infringes on 237 patents without taking action, but at the same time patents can't be targeted for invalidation using a legal loophole.
While I agree that something to this degree ought to be done, what's to keep someone from releasing a commercial non-licensed implementation very quietly, not promoting it for 90 days, then when the patent gets challenged they could claim it had been commercially available for 90 days without being challenged. I'd think you could invalidate almost any patent that way. Like I say, I'd like to see something to block submarine patents, but the legislation needs to be careful not to create a method for invalidating any patent. That said, I think the patent system is seriously broken, and I'd almost prefer to see it scrapped anyway.
I won't trust a company that makes people pay for "extra privacy." That screams distrust to me.
Did you read anything other than the headline? The summary even mentions that people are more willing to buy from a company that makes their privacy policy clear. Scenario:
Retailer X sells widget A for $10, and makes it clear that they protect your privacy
Retailer Y sells widget A for $9, and is ambiguous about their use of personal information.
More people are choosing retailer X than retailer Y.
I know this is slashdot, and I'm not asking you to read the article, but at least read the summary before posting a heated comment like that.
I dont know about you but to install openoffice I prefer typing (or use a GUI) emerge openoffice rather than going to openoffice.org, downloading the installer and hitting next 10 times.
Plus, package managers generally keep your software up to date to some degree. On windows I had probably a dozen programs that ran at startup just to make sure it's software was up to date, and the rest of my programs either required me to download updates myself (sometimes even buy updates to software I'd already bought).
Telling people how to fix problems fosters dependency on you. Showing them how to do it, in a manner that doesn't take years of command-line dorkdom to understand, is probably far more helpful.
I agree, which is part of the reason I showed her how to use the installer application. However there are many tasks that only need to be done during the initial setup. Even if she had to reinstall occasionally, I doubt she'd remember the instructions I gave her considering the infrequency with which they'd be used. So if she's not likely to remember the instructions anyway, I'm going to give her the easier set of instructions. For anything she's likely to encounter with any regularity, I show her what to do. If it's something that happens rarely, I'll tell her what to do, or do it myself.
I did that the day I set her up with Linux. My purpose in the story above was to demonstrate that the command line is the best way to give someone instructions. My girlfriend was afraid she was going to have to learn her way around the terminal, and I was trying to demonstrate that it wasn't entirely necessary, but it made many jobs much quicker so she shouldn't be afraid of it if I give her some instructions. I haven't really had to do much for her since then. When she got a bluetooth mouse I set it up over SSH, and when she needed to set up her printer, I did so using VNC (Kubuntu's printer GUI is a breeze).
This mentality bothers me. While the command line is intimidating at first, and end-users should never have to learn how to navigate the command line, if I'm giving instructions, I would much rather have someone using a command line.
For example, a few months back, my girlfriend wanted me to put Linux on her computer. She was saving up for a Mac, and her anti-virus had expired on Windows. She needed a web browser, office suite (She used OpenOffice on windows to begin with), and an instant messenger. I had her install Kubuntu, answering a few questions when she had them. Once it was installed, I pulled up a terminal to start installing some programs and codecs with apt. She was deathly afraid of learning the terminal, so I started stepping her through the installation with Adept Installer. The instructions for installing Flash went something like this:
- Click the "K"
- Click add/remove programs
- Type your password
- Check the box next to "unsupported"
- Check the box next to "Proprietary software"
- See where it says "KDE"? Click the down arrow and select "Any Suite"
- Type "flash" in the search box
- It's not in multimedia? Try "Others" I guess.
- Check the box next to "Macromedia Flash Plugin"
- Click "Apply Changes"
- When it's done, click "quit"
Alternatively, I could have told her:
- Click the 'K'
- Hover your mouse over 'System'
- Click 'Terminal Program (Konsole)'
- Can you remember that? Next time I may just say "Open a Terminal"
- Type "sudo aptitude install flashplugin-nonfree"
- Type your password
I explained to her that I didn't expect her to learn how to use the command line on her own, but it's a lot easier for me to tell her a command when I'm giving instructions. She hasn't used the terminal once on her own, and she's enjoyed perusing the programs available through Adept Installer, but she knows if I have to give her an instruction, it will be a lot easier to use the command line.
I realize it's initially intimidating for users to have to open a terminal, and I'd like to see graphical interfaces for everything a normal user would need to do, but I also wish we could get the average user to where they realized the set of instructions is a lot shorter when someone gives you a command than when they have to explain dozens of clicks.
Look, why does Linux have to take over the world? Can't you just use it and enjoy it? I understand being passionate about it, I promote it where it makes sense. But honestly, it isn't a replacement for Windows. And there is no need for it to be.
I promote Linux to people who are discontent with Windows but think the only alternative is a Mac. My girlfriend, for example, was tired of Windows but couldn't afford to replace her laptop with a Mac, so she asked me to help her set up Linux. She has been fairly content with it, though she finds it difficult to know what software to install for different tasks - I think this is more of an issue of everyone she knows using Windows, so nobody (except me) tells her about this cool new Linux program they just found.
My mother is a Windows user because that's all she knows. She doesn't want to learn another operating system, even if it is free. Personally, I don't think Ubuntu is any harder for a beginner to learn than is Windows, but once you have pre-conceived notions about what an OS should be, the learning curve becomes steeper. Right now, I'm not pressuring my mom to switch to Linux, but when she needs a new computer and the only Windows available is Vista, I'm going to make sure she knows she's on her own if she chooses Vista, but I'll be there to help her if she chooses Linux. This isn't because I hate Windows and want to force her to Linux, it's simply that I've never used Vista (and have no intentions to), so it would be significantly harder for me to help her on Vista than it was on XP (which I used for several years).
Then there's my dad, who is quite computer literate and has heard me talking about everything I can do with Linux, and thinks he wants to switch. I've tried to explain to him that at least two programs he uses every day have no Linux alternative and probably won't run under Wine. I've promoted the idea that he get a Mac because at least one of his significant programs is available on OSX, and he's considering the prospect. Whatever route he takes, I'm almost certain he'll need Windows in a Virtual Machine (at the very least) to get all of his work done.
I don't think too many people on slashdot are concerned about Microsoft actually suing anyone, but they can use this as FUD for a while. Going back to the article that started this discussion on slashdot a few days ago, MS was telling fortune 500 companies to start paying royalties when they used Linux. Some will pay royalties, some may switch to MS products and get locked in. A few will call their bluff and keep using Linux without paying MS a dime, but it's not likely that any of these will be loud enough for other companies to take notice, so Microsoft will be able to keep the game going. Eventually it may fall apart, but not until Microsoft has made millions (if not billions) from royalties and getting companies to use Microsoft products. Unless something can be done to force Microsoft to show their hand, they'll keep using this claim to slow the adoption of their competition.
I can't say the same for quicksort, but long before I ever heard the term "linked list" I was playing around with some C++ and trying to keep track of an indefinite number of objects. I discovered that I could create a pointer to an object that pointed to an object of the same type as the owner, allowing me to keep track of how ever many items I needed to. I was a 15 year old with no formal training whatsoever and I re-invented the linked list. That's not to say it became obsolete in 5-10 years, but I'd certainly say it satisfies the "simple and obvious" clause of patents.
Microsoft has been claiming that Linux infringes on patents for months, if not years. I don't think this will ever go to court (unless Microsoft is given a cease and desist and them MS gets sued). Look at who Microsoft was talking to: It wasn't threatening IBM, Canonical, the FSF, Torvalds, etc. It was demanding money from fortune 500 companies who use Linux. Some will comply for a while. Some will switch to Microsoft products, then get locked in. To protect it's "investment," Microsoft will make deals behind closed doors with companies that initially refused to pay MS - these deals will make it look like the company has complied, without requiring much of the company. Eventually, someone will publicly call Microsoft's bluff, and it will be over. Microsoft will have made millions (if not billions) on the scam, locked some big companies into Microsoft products, and temporarily tarnish the image of Linux (which depends on it's image for growth).
There's no need to substantiate their claims. Naming patent violations will simply get most of their patents invalidated, and the OS community will start on workarounds for the few patents that persist.
This is typical Microsoft. Rather than put their effort into a good product, the put their effort into destroying the competition. That's exactly why I'll use an alternative for as long as one is available.
If a monopoly is allowed to continue, it can kill innovation. One reason I use Linux instead of Windows is because I feel Microsoft has grown too comfortable with the state of Windows and has no interest in improving upon it, while I notice significant improvements in Ubuntu with every release cycle. Microsoft uses dubious legal tactics to stifle the competition rather than competing by creating a better product. If Microsoft can create a better product (and do so ethically), I may return to them as a customer, but if they think they can get my money simply by preventing competition from existing, I'm going to resist as long as there's an alternative.
I did the same thing last year. I had a single dorm room, and my bed was right across from my desk. Here are the LEDs I dealt with and how:
My computer case had incredibly bright blue LEDs for power and hard drive. I simply disconnected them from the motherboard. My router and USB hub had blinking / bright lights, so I put the USB hub up next to the router so they blocked the lights coming from each other. My speakers had a rather bright LED, so I kept the case for my wireless mouse in front of it most of the time. My bluetooth headset had a bright blue light when charging, so I kept it in a cup when it was charging. My printer, monitor, and laptop all had rather dim lights that didn't bother me, so I didn't do anything about them.
Basically, I don't mind dim-ish amber lights that don't blink when working normally, but blue lights bug me, really bright lights bug me, and lights that blink when working normally drive me nuts (it's another story if they're trying to alert me of a problem). It's gotten to the point that if something is going to be in my bedroom, the LEDs are something I consider before making a purchase.
I don't think this will happen. Microsoft will keep making these claims, perhaps getting a little more specific, but they won't name patents, and they won't take anyone to court. It's the purest of FUD. If they take this to court, the majority of their patents will be invalidated, and those patents which are upheld will be rewritten. (I know this is different than the SCO case which pointed to specific infringed code, but patents protect implementations of ideas - not the original idea, so while it would be difficult and time consuming, it can be done). Microsoft will use this for as long as possible, and eventually someone will call their bluff, but they'll make millions in the mean time.
Why not write software that fills the gaps that keep people on Linux. That's what will make MS shit themselves.
I agree that ultimately the best solution is a native Linux version / alternative for every program out there, but that's going to take a very long time (if it ever happens), and Wine is a nice stepping stone.
I use Wine for three different pieces of software. One is a game, one is an investment program, and one is used to compile and test programs for microchips. None of these programs are available for Linux or have free alternatives, and it's unlikely that any of them ever will. But without Wine I'd still be booting Windows to use the last two, and I'd probably just never play the game. They're very specialized programs that would take tons of time to recreate, and currently there's not enough market to make it worthwhile to the vendors, but there is Wine.
Wine helps create a market for Linux software by making it easier to adopt Linux. If desktop Linux gets up to around 10%, software makers will notice and start trying to get a piece of that pie. The simplest solution for them may mean making sure their apps run well on Wine. In fact I believe Google Earth and Picasa for Linux use mainly Windows code but use Wine libraries to make it run on Linux.
Getting companies to work for Wine compatibility isn't going to "make MS shit themselves", but IMHO, the goal is the availability of software on Linux, not rubbing Microsoft's nose in it.
P.S. Please don't link Matt Hartley articles, he has not been insightful in any article I have ever read. Feel free to look back through his previous nonsense.
People say the same thing every time slashdot links to a Dvorak article, and while I agree that that articles are generally trolling, I find that the slashdot discussion is often relatively interesting. And really, who reads slashdot for the articles? (For that matter, who even reads the articles?)
The minute you install the pirated software, you have no moral leg to stand on. You either stick to your guns or you leave. The "I did it because it was my job to do it" defense has been tried (literally) and failed.
You may have no legal leg to stand on, but moral? Come on. It's one thing for a young, single, bottom of the pay scale worker to be able to quit and go find another job. But it's not so easy when you've got a family and have to put food on the table, and you've been around a company that starting over would take several months and would set you back several grand a year. It may be a moral dilemma, but personally I'd think less of a man who couldn't pay his rent or keep food on the table than one who installed some pirated software because his boss told him to.
This guy definitely needs to cover his ass to make sure that if the company gets in trouble, he's not going to be the fall guy, but to say he should quit his job over something like this isn't looking at the big picture.
People usually suggests apt-get because it is faster to describe, but there is nothing you can do with apt-get that you cannot do with Synaptics using only GUI and point and click.
Exactly. A couple months ago, my girlfriend's windows installation crapped out on her. She had heard me talking about Linux and wanted to try it. I stepped her through the Kubuntu install, answering a few questions but she did most of it on her own. There were a couple of times I pulled up a terminal to install a program, and she was worried that she was going to have to learn to use the terminal. So the next time there was a program to install, I had her do it with Adept. I tried describing exactly what she should click, and after about 2 minutes she'd found the package and installed it. I told her she could have done the exact same thing by typing 'sudo aptitude install -package-', and the instructions would have been a lot simpler. I didn't expect her to know these commands off the top of her head, and graphical interfaces are great for figuring out how to do things, but when giving someone instructions on how to do something, the command line is as easy as it gets.
Since then, she's only used the terminal to run commands I tell her to run. She hasn't learned to use it on her own, but she gets along just fine with the GUIs - she's even found some cool games in the repositories that I didn't know existed.
My experience with feisty was not quite so "neat". I tried upgrading. This mostly worked, but everytime the computer booted, I was getting dispatched to a root terminal with the instructions "Command apt-get not found. Type 'apt-get install apt' to install." Needless to say that didn't work, but if I typed "exit" it would continue to KDM just fine. It took a reinstall before it would boot to KDM, but I keep my home partition separate, so that wasn't a big deal.
Once in Ubuntu, I found that hibernate no longer worked because my swap partition had somehow been disabled by the update, and suspend didn't work for other reasons (which I was eventually able to troubleshoot with the help of the forums). Sound didn't work, but I got a patch for that relatively quickly. Wireless worked fine but my VPN client (vpnc) gave me an error that it couldn't load a module it needed, so I couldn't connect to my campus network. I found that this could be fixed by regressing to the Edgy version of vpnc.
The thing that keeps me on edgy for now is the fact that feisty will randomly lock up for about 30 seconds at a time. Supposedly this relates to the new hard drive management, and keeping a CD in the drive will keep it from happening, but that hasn't worked for me so I'm not switching until a fix for this has been issued.
I had similar problems after the initial release of edgy, but they were all ironed out after about a month. I think Ubuntu is a great distro, but they tend to jump the gun a bit on releases.
That looks pretty cool. Probably not as cheap as a roll-your-own method, but undoubtedly more stable. The fact that they offer a 30 day free trial is also somewhat encouraging.
Recently they lost a court case that allowed a device to copy DVDs to the device for later playback. They're trying to retain some control over how their media is used by setting guidelines regarding the expanded fair use before they simply lose control in court battles.
Is it just me, or do all the third parties seem a bit too extremist to be taken seriously? They've all got something just completely unworkable, like a $16/hr minimum wage or privatizing all roads and education.
Mainstream politicians want votes. If a third party candidate is advocating $16/hr minimum wage, and they get 3% of the vote, next time around the main stream politicians are going to be looking for a way to tap into that 3%, so they might advocate raising minimum wage to $8/hr. Similarly if a candidate advocating privatization of roads gets a few percent, a main stream candidate might be able to win over some votes by moving road maintenance to a user fee system (gas taxes) as opposed to part of income taxes.
In neither case are the extremists getting everything they want, but they might view it as a step in the right direction. If third party had a chance at being heard by the general population, they might advocate more realistic platforms, but the current purpose of the third parties is to draw votes from mainstream candidates while encouraging movement towards their beliefs.
They understand that they can't do it all... a vibrant third-party market means more people by Microsoft's platform.
Have you not seen Microsoft try and completely dominate everything remotely related to computers? They pretty much wiped the floor with alternative Office Suites. They started focusing on web browsers, and for a while pages were built solely with IE in mind. They've created unnecessary media formats where good alternatives were readily available. And what the hell are they doing with a search engine? It's never made sense to me that the company who makes an OS also needs to make a search engine. Then you've got the Zune, the XBox, a number of devices that run Windows Mobile. In server space they have web servers, mail servers, etc. The only thing remotely related to computers that I haven't seen Microsoft try to dominate is CAD software.
There may be a wide variety of third party software and hardware, but it's not because microsoft has just yielded the field.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe, but if you could invalidate somebody's patent just by infringing quietly for 90 days there would be more incentive to create a product that exists solely to invalidate the patent, and a worthwhile product could come along once the patent no longer applied.
I have an AI professor who came up with and patented an algorithm for a recommendation system. A couple of years ago, he was excited that a small, startup company had come to him to license his patent to make a movie recommendation site. He got a fair amount of money which he used to help fund other research.
Now suppose your system were in place. Instead of coming to my professor to license the patent, the company simply launches the website quietly. After it's been up 90 days they start buying ads and the website takes off. If the patent holder tries to enforce the patent once they hear about the site, the company can simply show that the website had been available for 90 days prior to the enforcement attempt.
I think a better system would require enforcement once there was a reasonable expectation that the patent holder should know about the infringement. This would mean no waiting for JPEGs to become the top graphic on the web before enforcing the patents, and Microsoft couldn't claim Linux infringes on 237 patents without taking action, but at the same time patents can't be targeted for invalidation using a legal loophole.
While I agree that something to this degree ought to be done, what's to keep someone from releasing a commercial non-licensed implementation very quietly, not promoting it for 90 days, then when the patent gets challenged they could claim it had been commercially available for 90 days without being challenged. I'd think you could invalidate almost any patent that way. Like I say, I'd like to see something to block submarine patents, but the legislation needs to be careful not to create a method for invalidating any patent. That said, I think the patent system is seriously broken, and I'd almost prefer to see it scrapped anyway.
IE7: 19.2%
IE6: 38.1%
IE5: 1.5%
Fx: 33.7%
Moz: 1.3%
Saf: 1.5%
Op: 1.6%
There's still a fair amount of room to be made up, but at 33.7% Firefox can't be ignored by anyone who wants to be taken seriously.
Did you read anything other than the headline? The summary even mentions that people are more willing to buy from a company that makes their privacy policy clear. Scenario:
Retailer X sells widget A for $10, and makes it clear that they protect your privacy
Retailer Y sells widget A for $9, and is ambiguous about their use of personal information.
More people are choosing retailer X than retailer Y.
I know this is slashdot, and I'm not asking you to read the article, but at least read the summary before posting a heated comment like that.
I agree, which is part of the reason I showed her how to use the installer application. However there are many tasks that only need to be done during the initial setup. Even if she had to reinstall occasionally, I doubt she'd remember the instructions I gave her considering the infrequency with which they'd be used. So if she's not likely to remember the instructions anyway, I'm going to give her the easier set of instructions. For anything she's likely to encounter with any regularity, I show her what to do. If it's something that happens rarely, I'll tell her what to do, or do it myself.
I did that the day I set her up with Linux. My purpose in the story above was to demonstrate that the command line is the best way to give someone instructions. My girlfriend was afraid she was going to have to learn her way around the terminal, and I was trying to demonstrate that it wasn't entirely necessary, but it made many jobs much quicker so she shouldn't be afraid of it if I give her some instructions. I haven't really had to do much for her since then. When she got a bluetooth mouse I set it up over SSH, and when she needed to set up her printer, I did so using VNC (Kubuntu's printer GUI is a breeze).
This mentality bothers me. While the command line is intimidating at first, and end-users should never have to learn how to navigate the command line, if I'm giving instructions, I would much rather have someone using a command line.
For example, a few months back, my girlfriend wanted me to put Linux on her computer. She was saving up for a Mac, and her anti-virus had expired on Windows. She needed a web browser, office suite (She used OpenOffice on windows to begin with), and an instant messenger. I had her install Kubuntu, answering a few questions when she had them. Once it was installed, I pulled up a terminal to start installing some programs and codecs with apt. She was deathly afraid of learning the terminal, so I started stepping her through the installation with Adept Installer. The instructions for installing Flash went something like this:
- Click the "K"
- Click add/remove programs
- Type your password
- Check the box next to "unsupported"
- Check the box next to "Proprietary software"
- See where it says "KDE"? Click the down arrow and select "Any Suite"
- Type "flash" in the search box
- It's not in multimedia? Try "Others" I guess.
- Check the box next to "Macromedia Flash Plugin"
- Click "Apply Changes"
- When it's done, click "quit"
Alternatively, I could have told her:
- Click the 'K'
- Hover your mouse over 'System'
- Click 'Terminal Program (Konsole)'
- Can you remember that? Next time I may just say "Open a Terminal"
- Type "sudo aptitude install flashplugin-nonfree"
- Type your password
I explained to her that I didn't expect her to learn how to use the command line on her own, but it's a lot easier for me to tell her a command when I'm giving instructions. She hasn't used the terminal once on her own, and she's enjoyed perusing the programs available through Adept Installer, but she knows if I have to give her an instruction, it will be a lot easier to use the command line.
I realize it's initially intimidating for users to have to open a terminal, and I'd like to see graphical interfaces for everything a normal user would need to do, but I also wish we could get the average user to where they realized the set of instructions is a lot shorter when someone gives you a command than when they have to explain dozens of clicks.
I promote Linux to people who are discontent with Windows but think the only alternative is a Mac. My girlfriend, for example, was tired of Windows but couldn't afford to replace her laptop with a Mac, so she asked me to help her set up Linux. She has been fairly content with it, though she finds it difficult to know what software to install for different tasks - I think this is more of an issue of everyone she knows using Windows, so nobody (except me) tells her about this cool new Linux program they just found.
My mother is a Windows user because that's all she knows. She doesn't want to learn another operating system, even if it is free. Personally, I don't think Ubuntu is any harder for a beginner to learn than is Windows, but once you have pre-conceived notions about what an OS should be, the learning curve becomes steeper. Right now, I'm not pressuring my mom to switch to Linux, but when she needs a new computer and the only Windows available is Vista, I'm going to make sure she knows she's on her own if she chooses Vista, but I'll be there to help her if she chooses Linux. This isn't because I hate Windows and want to force her to Linux, it's simply that I've never used Vista (and have no intentions to), so it would be significantly harder for me to help her on Vista than it was on XP (which I used for several years).
Then there's my dad, who is quite computer literate and has heard me talking about everything I can do with Linux, and thinks he wants to switch. I've tried to explain to him that at least two programs he uses every day have no Linux alternative and probably won't run under Wine. I've promoted the idea that he get a Mac because at least one of his significant programs is available on OSX, and he's considering the prospect. Whatever route he takes, I'm almost certain he'll need Windows in a Virtual Machine (at the very least) to get all of his work done.
I don't think too many people on slashdot are concerned about Microsoft actually suing anyone, but they can use this as FUD for a while. Going back to the article that started this discussion on slashdot a few days ago, MS was telling fortune 500 companies to start paying royalties when they used Linux. Some will pay royalties, some may switch to MS products and get locked in. A few will call their bluff and keep using Linux without paying MS a dime, but it's not likely that any of these will be loud enough for other companies to take notice, so Microsoft will be able to keep the game going. Eventually it may fall apart, but not until Microsoft has made millions (if not billions) from royalties and getting companies to use Microsoft products. Unless something can be done to force Microsoft to show their hand, they'll keep using this claim to slow the adoption of their competition.
I can't say the same for quicksort, but long before I ever heard the term "linked list" I was playing around with some C++ and trying to keep track of an indefinite number of objects. I discovered that I could create a pointer to an object that pointed to an object of the same type as the owner, allowing me to keep track of how ever many items I needed to. I was a 15 year old with no formal training whatsoever and I re-invented the linked list. That's not to say it became obsolete in 5-10 years, but I'd certainly say it satisfies the "simple and obvious" clause of patents.
There's no need to substantiate their claims. Naming patent violations will simply get most of their patents invalidated, and the OS community will start on workarounds for the few patents that persist.
This is typical Microsoft. Rather than put their effort into a good product, the put their effort into destroying the competition. That's exactly why I'll use an alternative for as long as one is available.
If a monopoly is allowed to continue, it can kill innovation. One reason I use Linux instead of Windows is because I feel Microsoft has grown too comfortable with the state of Windows and has no interest in improving upon it, while I notice significant improvements in Ubuntu with every release cycle. Microsoft uses dubious legal tactics to stifle the competition rather than competing by creating a better product. If Microsoft can create a better product (and do so ethically), I may return to them as a customer, but if they think they can get my money simply by preventing competition from existing, I'm going to resist as long as there's an alternative.
My computer case had incredibly bright blue LEDs for power and hard drive. I simply disconnected them from the motherboard. My router and USB hub had blinking / bright lights, so I put the USB hub up next to the router so they blocked the lights coming from each other. My speakers had a rather bright LED, so I kept the case for my wireless mouse in front of it most of the time. My bluetooth headset had a bright blue light when charging, so I kept it in a cup when it was charging. My printer, monitor, and laptop all had rather dim lights that didn't bother me, so I didn't do anything about them.
Basically, I don't mind dim-ish amber lights that don't blink when working normally, but blue lights bug me, really bright lights bug me, and lights that blink when working normally drive me nuts (it's another story if they're trying to alert me of a problem). It's gotten to the point that if something is going to be in my bedroom, the LEDs are something I consider before making a purchase.
I don't think this will happen. Microsoft will keep making these claims, perhaps getting a little more specific, but they won't name patents, and they won't take anyone to court. It's the purest of FUD. If they take this to court, the majority of their patents will be invalidated, and those patents which are upheld will be rewritten. (I know this is different than the SCO case which pointed to specific infringed code, but patents protect implementations of ideas - not the original idea, so while it would be difficult and time consuming, it can be done). Microsoft will use this for as long as possible, and eventually someone will call their bluff, but they'll make millions in the mean time.
I agree that ultimately the best solution is a native Linux version / alternative for every program out there, but that's going to take a very long time (if it ever happens), and Wine is a nice stepping stone.
I use Wine for three different pieces of software. One is a game, one is an investment program, and one is used to compile and test programs for microchips. None of these programs are available for Linux or have free alternatives, and it's unlikely that any of them ever will. But without Wine I'd still be booting Windows to use the last two, and I'd probably just never play the game. They're very specialized programs that would take tons of time to recreate, and currently there's not enough market to make it worthwhile to the vendors, but there is Wine.
Wine helps create a market for Linux software by making it easier to adopt Linux. If desktop Linux gets up to around 10%, software makers will notice and start trying to get a piece of that pie. The simplest solution for them may mean making sure their apps run well on Wine. In fact I believe Google Earth and Picasa for Linux use mainly Windows code but use Wine libraries to make it run on Linux.
Getting companies to work for Wine compatibility isn't going to "make MS shit themselves", but IMHO, the goal is the availability of software on Linux, not rubbing Microsoft's nose in it.
You may have no legal leg to stand on, but moral? Come on. It's one thing for a young, single, bottom of the pay scale worker to be able to quit and go find another job. But it's not so easy when you've got a family and have to put food on the table, and you've been around a company that starting over would take several months and would set you back several grand a year. It may be a moral dilemma, but personally I'd think less of a man who couldn't pay his rent or keep food on the table than one who installed some pirated software because his boss told him to.
This guy definitely needs to cover his ass to make sure that if the company gets in trouble, he's not going to be the fall guy, but to say he should quit his job over something like this isn't looking at the big picture.
At least he didn't do it as an Anonymous coward.
Exactly. A couple months ago, my girlfriend's windows installation crapped out on her. She had heard me talking about Linux and wanted to try it. I stepped her through the Kubuntu install, answering a few questions but she did most of it on her own. There were a couple of times I pulled up a terminal to install a program, and she was worried that she was going to have to learn to use the terminal. So the next time there was a program to install, I had her do it with Adept. I tried describing exactly what she should click, and after about 2 minutes she'd found the package and installed it. I told her she could have done the exact same thing by typing 'sudo aptitude install -package-', and the instructions would have been a lot simpler. I didn't expect her to know these commands off the top of her head, and graphical interfaces are great for figuring out how to do things, but when giving someone instructions on how to do something, the command line is as easy as it gets.
Since then, she's only used the terminal to run commands I tell her to run. She hasn't learned to use it on her own, but she gets along just fine with the GUIs - she's even found some cool games in the repositories that I didn't know existed.
Once in Ubuntu, I found that hibernate no longer worked because my swap partition had somehow been disabled by the update, and suspend didn't work for other reasons (which I was eventually able to troubleshoot with the help of the forums). Sound didn't work, but I got a patch for that relatively quickly. Wireless worked fine but my VPN client (vpnc) gave me an error that it couldn't load a module it needed, so I couldn't connect to my campus network. I found that this could be fixed by regressing to the Edgy version of vpnc.
The thing that keeps me on edgy for now is the fact that feisty will randomly lock up for about 30 seconds at a time. Supposedly this relates to the new hard drive management, and keeping a CD in the drive will keep it from happening, but that hasn't worked for me so I'm not switching until a fix for this has been issued.
I had similar problems after the initial release of edgy, but they were all ironed out after about a month. I think Ubuntu is a great distro, but they tend to jump the gun a bit on releases.
That looks pretty cool. Probably not as cheap as a roll-your-own method, but undoubtedly more stable. The fact that they offer a 30 day free trial is also somewhat encouraging.
Recently they lost a court case that allowed a device to copy DVDs to the device for later playback. They're trying to retain some control over how their media is used by setting guidelines regarding the expanded fair use before they simply lose control in court battles.
Mainstream politicians want votes. If a third party candidate is advocating $16/hr minimum wage, and they get 3% of the vote, next time around the main stream politicians are going to be looking for a way to tap into that 3%, so they might advocate raising minimum wage to $8/hr. Similarly if a candidate advocating privatization of roads gets a few percent, a main stream candidate might be able to win over some votes by moving road maintenance to a user fee system (gas taxes) as opposed to part of income taxes.
In neither case are the extremists getting everything they want, but they might view it as a step in the right direction. If third party had a chance at being heard by the general population, they might advocate more realistic platforms, but the current purpose of the third parties is to draw votes from mainstream candidates while encouraging movement towards their beliefs.
Have you not seen Microsoft try and completely dominate everything remotely related to computers? They pretty much wiped the floor with alternative Office Suites. They started focusing on web browsers, and for a while pages were built solely with IE in mind. They've created unnecessary media formats where good alternatives were readily available. And what the hell are they doing with a search engine? It's never made sense to me that the company who makes an OS also needs to make a search engine. Then you've got the Zune, the XBox, a number of devices that run Windows Mobile. In server space they have web servers, mail servers, etc. The only thing remotely related to computers that I haven't seen Microsoft try to dominate is CAD software.
There may be a wide variety of third party software and hardware, but it's not because microsoft has just yielded the field.